Skip to content


Jagat Singh and ors. Vs. Joginder Singh Amrik Singh and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectInsurance;Motor Vehicles
CourtPunjab and Haryana High Court
Decided On
Judge
Reported inII(1984)ACC146
AppellantJagat Singh and ors.
RespondentJoginder Singh Amrik Singh and ors.
Cases ReferredLachhman Singh v. Gurmit Kaur
Excerpt:
- administrative law - government contract: [vijender jain, c.j., rajive bhalla & sury kant, jj] government contract rejection of highest bid challenge as to held, state has no dominus status to dictate unilateral terms and conditions when it enters into contract. its actions must be reasonable, fair and just in consonance with rule of law. as a necessary corollary thereto, state cannot refuse to confirm highest bid without assigning any valid reason and/or by giving erratic, irrational or irrelevant reasons. the state is free to enter into a contract just like any other individual and the contract shall not change its legal character merely because other party to contract is state. though no citizen possesses a legal right to compel state to enter into a contract, yet latter can..........and it was in this accident that gursaran singh sustained injuries which proved fatal.3. gursaran singh, deceased, was only 22 years of age at the time of his death and his parents were under 50 years of age at that time. it has come on record that the deceased was earning a salary of rs. 350/- per month and in addition be also used to be paid a daily allowance at the rate of rs. 6/- a day. this being the evidence, the compensation awarded by the tribunal cannot but he termed as inadequate. the amount awarded being rs. 12,000/-.4. compensation payable here is governed by the principles as set out by the full bench in lachhman singh v. gurmit kaur 1979 p.l.r. 1. keeping in view the relevant factors as mentioned therein it would be reasonable to assume that if the deceased had lived he.....
Judgment:

S.S. Sodhi, J.

1. This is an appeal by the claimants seeking enhanced compensation for the loss suffered by them on account of the death of their sod Gursaran Singh.

2. Gursaran Singh was killed in a motor accident on June 13, 1975; while travelling in the truck DHG-3620. It was the finding of the Tribunal that on the account of the rash and negligent driving of this truck, it went and fait into a military truck and it was in this accident that Gursaran Singh sustained injuries which proved fatal.

3. Gursaran Singh, deceased, was only 22 years of age at the time of his death and his parents were under 50 years of age at that time. It has come on record that the deceased was earning a salary of Rs. 350/- per month and in addition be also used to be paid a daily allowance at the rate of Rs. 6/- a day. This being the evidence, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal cannot but he termed as inadequate. The amount awarded being Rs. 12,000/-.

4. Compensation payable here is governed by the principles as set out by the Full Bench in Lachhman Singh v. Gurmit Kaur 1979 P.L.R. 1. Keeping in view the relevant factors as mentioned therein it would be reasonable to assume that if the deceased had lived he would within a couple of years have got married and thereafter had a family to support. This is relevant for considering the amount that the deceased would have been able to spare for his parents. In the totality of the circumstances of the deceased and the claimants it would be reasonable to assume that the loss to the parents here was to the tune of Rs. 150/- per month. Taking 15 to be the multiplier, the amount payable to them as compensation would work out to Rs. 27,000/-. The compensation awarded to them is accordingly enhanced to this extent, which they shall be entitled to along with interest at the rate of 12 percent per annum from the date of the application to the date of the payment of the amount awarded.

5. This appeal is consequently hereby accepted with costs. Counsel's fee Rs. 300/-.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //